tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Oct 04 15:01:37 1996

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

Re: DaH tlhIngan jIHbej

96-10-04 00:22:00 EDT, jatlh Qorbeq:

> > > mu'tlheghwIj vIlaDqa'DI', jIHaghqu'pu' !! {{:-D

>  > chaq {-pu'} DateqnIS . . . "jIHaghqu'!"
>  
>  Hmmm ... too subtle for me perhaps ? I can't really see the problem with
>  what I wrote.
>  
>  I "really laughed" just the once. I don't laugh NOW when I read it again
but
>  I *DID* really laugh at the time when I *DID* read it again. yIQIj !

Well, remember, a Klingon sentence without aspect marking doesn't mean that
the sentence is present tense ("now").

When I read your sentence, {mu'tlheghwIj vIlaDqa'DI', jIHaghqu'pu'!}, I at
first read it as "When I began reading my sentence again, I had laughed a
lot!"  As it stands, you're saying that at the moment you reread the
sentence, you had already laughed.

See, the first part of the sentence, {mu'tlheghwIj vIlaDqa'DI'}, sets the
time context of the sentence; the action is happening "when I reread my
sentence."  When you put {-pu'} on the main clauses's verb, {Hagh}, you're
saying that the laughing was completed some time before, up to the time of
the reading.  "When" you reread it, it "was completed."

But if you get rid of the {-pu'}, you are saying, "When I reread my sentence,
I laughed a lot."  {mu'tlheghwIj vIlaDqa'DI' jIHaghqu'}  The time context is
the same; the main action happens "When I reread my sentence."  Now, since
we've established the timeframe, any action without an aspect marker simply
occurs at that time.

Since I expect that you laughed when you reread your sentence, and not
before, I figured that this is what you meant.  qar'a'?  yaj'a'?

(By the way, I agree with, who was it?  charghwI'?  I agree that {-qa'} is
being slightly overextended to mean "do again."  It was meant to be "resume,"
as in, "the action (or state) was happening before, there was a change, and
now another change has caused the action to happen again.  This is why is it
a Type 3 verb suffix, along with {-choH}.  They both indicate a change of
state of the situation, which "do again" does not do.  Anybody got any ideas
for other ways to indicate doing something again, without using {-qa'}?  Or a
way to convince me that "do again" really does fall into the category of
"change"?)

SuStel
Stardate 96760.7

Back to archive top level